The clip looks like it’s a different color on Lumintop’s site too. I really like the (acid wash?) dark finish on mine and would definitely prefer to have that when I buy more.

Well… if I buy more. There’s an Emisar D4 v2 coming up, and Hank doesn’t cheap out like Lumintop seems to be, even when he reduces the price (the D4 was introduced at $40, which was later reduced to $35). I was concerned that early FW3As might have problems that later ones would not, but it’s looking like the opposite is true.

I have seen car manufacturers change entire global supplier agreements (these were legal contracts drafted and signed for several years) because the new parts were a few US cents cheaper. The supplier was forced to sign a new agreement. Even pennies will add up over thousands of products and SKUs.

The glass lens and Carclo optic are probably expensive, not always easy to source, and have a 100% take rate (every light sold has them/needs them, so not optional).

While most of us probably don’t want a new lens/optics combo, from an engineering point of view it is a good way to ensure an almost identical product outcome while saving a lot of money.

You could also use a cheaper aluminum source, cheaper parts for the driver, a cheaper clip or drop it entirely, re-design the inner tube and make it skinnier and a more permanent part of the assembly, replace the metal switch with a rubber boot, and do a lot more!

The thing is, this is not a product Lumintop designed themselves. If Lumintop wants to change the design of say… the Tool AA, that’s fine as long as they don’t describe the old one to customers and send the new one. At worst, reviewers and community influencers will say it’s no longer a good choice.

The FW3A is a community design where volunteers did a bunch of work because they wanted it to exist and gave the result to Lumintop. Lumintop saves development costs and gets to build a product for a known market. The community has certain expectations as a result, though they’re not enforceable in the same way a contract is. The most extreme option would be someone running a second group buy to take the design to another manufacturer. They probably do have a contract with Neal, and we don’t know what’s in it. We do know Neal was expecting 10511s and glass lenses, and that’s not what he got.

Community expectations include a glass lens, a Carclo 10511 optic, a clip of the specified design, and a metal button. If Lumintop wants to make another light derived from the FW3A design using different parts and sell that at a different price point, nobody here will complain, as long as they keep making FW3As with the original design.

The thing is, this is not a product Lumintop designed themselves. If Lumintop wants to change the design of say… the Tool AA, that’s fine as long as they don’t describe the old one to customers and send the new one. At worst, reviewers and community influencers will say it’s no longer a good choice.

The FW3A is a community design where volunteers did a bunch of work because they wanted it to exist and gave the result to Lumintop. Lumintop saves development costs and gets to build a product for a known market. The community has certain expectations as a result, though they’re not enforceable in the same way a contract is. The most extreme option would be someone running a second group buy to take the design to another manufacturer. They probably do have a contract with Neal, and we don’t know what’s in it. We do know Neal was expecting 10511s and glass lenses, and that’s not what he got.

Community expectations include a glass lens, a Carclo 10511 optic, a clip of the specified design, and a metal button. If Lumintop wants to make another light derived from the FW3A design using different parts and sell that at a different price point, nobody here will complain, as long as they keep making FW3As with the original design.

This is a very good point. I’m trying my best to be patient. I have plans for the additional 3 that I ordered, but they’re based on the original parts being there.

this is bad.. why even change the optics to cheaper? makes no sense… sometimes i dont understand lumintops logic… I understand maybe now they didnt earn enough on all group buys or whatever reason, but just bump up the price slightly then and keep the Carclo optics instead.

You could also use a cheaper aluminum source, cheaper parts for the driver, a cheaper clip or drop it entirely, re-design the inner tube and make it skinnier and a more permanent part of the assembly, replace the metal switch with a rubber boot, and do a lot more!

No more cost saving ideas please!

Well at least the new optic looks like it is a good match for the ruff MCPCB.
I believe the new optic setup is a bad move.

If Lumintop wants to change the design of say… the Tool AA, that’s fine as long as they don’t describe the old one to customers and send the new one. At worst, reviewers and community influencers will say it’s no longer a good choice.

They did this with the Tool AAA already. It’s some unknown osram emitter and pebbled TIR now like the EDC01. Updated the marketing after the fact and called it by the same name.

Disappointing, to say the least. As others have said, I should have bought a couple more early, but didn’t due to emitter options, and indecision. I hope I’m wrong, but further cheapening will probably occur, or is occurring. I bought optics already to switch out, but I will only buy more flashlights if I can find proper lenses to fit. I am not interested in any with this new optic.

I have seen car manufacturers change entire global supplier agreements (these were legal contracts drafted and signed for several years) because the new parts were a few US cents cheaper. The supplier was forced to sign a new agreement. Even pennies will add up over thousands of products and SKUs.

The glass lens and Carclo optic are probably expensive, not always easy to source, and have a 100% take rate (every light sold has them/needs them, so not optional).

While most of us probably don’t want a new lens/optics combo, from an engineering point of view it is a good way to ensure an almost identical product outcome while saving a lot of money.

You could also use a cheaper aluminum source, cheaper parts for the driver, a cheaper clip or drop it entirely, re-design the inner tube and make it skinnier and a more permanent part of the assembly, replace the metal switch with a rubber boot, and do a lot more!

If Toyota would do this with their cars, they would end up selling Ladas and no longer Toyotas!

Anyone got an idea when the colorful ones will be for sale? I really want that blue!

Not sure, but probably pretty soon I think.

I got two of the color samples today — purple and white. Both are just like they appear in the pictures. Purple looks really good, especially with a black clip installed. White is nice also, and has sort of a grainy texture. So I assume it uses a different process than regular anodizing. Like most white things, it may be difficult to keep clean.

Hopefully I can get some decent pictures tomorrow.

Thank you TK, the blue and maybe the white are my picks. I thought I wanted the copper but it’s apparently only raw Polished finish without a coating so I think I’ll be too hard on the light and it’ll end up looking natty
Gosh and now reading about he changes to the lens and optic setup it’s a bit of a downer that I gifted 3 of the 4 I ordered, should have kept the originals and gifted the new models haha